You can't do too much exercise in later life, research by Cambridge University suggests.

The study of 15,000 Britons aged 40 to 79 found that active men and women who increased their fitness levels halved the risk of early death.

The research found that if people followed Government guidance to carry out 150 minutes of exercise a week, they could cut mortality risks by almost one quarter, compared with couch potatoes.

This can be achieved by around 20 minutes exercise daily, or 30 minutes five times a week.

But the best results of all were seen among those who already active for an average of around 42 minutes a day - who managed around 20 minutes more.

Such participants cut the risk of early death by 42 per cent, the study found .
Activity included office work and walking, as well as leisure time activity such as cycling or sport.

The study, published in The BMJ, found individuals could experience "substantial" benefits - regardless of how much exercise they had done previously.

The researchers studied 14,599 men and women, aged 40 to 79 years old, who were assessed between 1993 and 1997 and followed until 2016.
Higher physical activity levels and increases in physical activity over time were both linked with a longer life, the study found.

People who were inactive at the start of the study, and gradually met guidelines of 150 minutes per week (20 minutes a day) of moderate-intensity physical activity over the next five years, were at a 24 per cent lower risk of death, compared with those who remained inactive.

Those who went from 300 minutes to 450 minutes exercise a week saw the greatest boost - with a 42 per cent fall in mortality rates.

This could be achieved by taking 64 minutes exercise every day, instead of 42 minutes.

"These results are encouraging, not least for middle-aged and older adults with existing cardiovascular disease and cancer, who can still gain substantial longevity benefits by becoming more active, lending further support to the broad public health benefits of physical activity," researchers said.

"In addition to shifting the population towards meeting the minimum physical activity recommendations, public health efforts should also focus on the maintenance of physical activity levels, specifically preventing declines over mid to late life."

During the study period, there were 3,148 deaths, including 950 deaths from cardiovascular disease and 1,091 deaths from cancer.

Huw Edwards, from not-for-profit health body Ukactive, said: “This research provides further evidence against the outdated idea that people should do less as they age or when they are managing a long-term illness. The time has come for a total rethink of how we approach our later years, with daily physical activity a crucial ingredient for maintaining our health, happiness, independence and social connections. Only by reimagining ageing, can our society reduce the growing burden on our NHS and social care systems.”

Louise Ansari, from Centre for Ageing Better, said: “These are significant results. People are living longer, and if we are more active in our 40s and 50s, we will have healthier later lives.

“But many of us don’t do the amount of physical activity that’s needed. It’s not just about aerobic exercise like running or cycling. All adults should also do activities that boost their strength and balance twice a week.

“A good mix of different exercises can help everyone to stay healthy, active and independent.”

Excellent information, and I saw similar guidelines mentioned during a news show last night. I think it was 150 minutes per week for cardio, which could be as simple as walking, and then 2-3 other sessions with resistance or HIIT. Healthy mitochondria really help people age well.

My wife said to me a few years ago "Don't you think that you are getting a little carried away with the walking?" as I headed out on another of my daily hour long after dinner walks. I replied with a question: "So is sitting down watching TV for 2 or 3 hours after dinner is a better choice?" She's never complained again about my daily exercise routine. According to this study, it looks like moving is a good move and the amount that I do on average appears to be optimal.

One thing that this article fails to point out, though, is that it is somewhat associational. Exercise is great for you. There is no arguing that point. But I know for a fact that for me diet has a causal relationship with exercise. When I ate a terrible carb & processed food rich diet I ate too much, had no energy, and the last thing that I wanted to do was to get out of my recliner and move. I was all about conserving energy - shortest distance between two points. But once I fixed my metabolism by eating a healthy diet that was right for my body, I was suddenly bursting with energy. I couldn't help but move. My weight had little to do with it. I still weighed 375 pounds when I started a regular walking routine. In the past 30 years I made several extended attempts at weight loss, mostly from low carb "dieting." Every time that I managed to get on a roll with the diet, exercise joined the party. I found that I enjoyed the exercise. When the "diet" floundered and I returned to eating the SAD, the exercise that I enjoyed floundered a short while later, too. I don't think that was a coincidence.

So the way I see it -- eating a good diet is going to extend ones life all on its own. A good diet + exercise may extend life even more. But eating a good diet one is likely to move more naturally. For me, moving more is really not an option. Moving as much as I do? Well, I enjoy the exercise and how I feel as a result of it. I do make time for it - just like a hobby or other activity that one enjoys doing. But the question here is... Will a person with a broken metabolism eating an awful diet benefit much from moving more - even if they force themselves to do it? My guess is yes - but maybe not as much as the person eating a healthy diet that doesn't get their 150+ active minutes in each week. Who knows? Moving too much with a body riddled with inflammation might even be counter productive. I say that exercise is important, but a healthy diet is the foundation of a long and healthy life.

To generalize even more from what you are saying Ken about this study being associational. perhaps healthier people exercise more and since people are more likely to be healthy if they are eating a diet that promotes health it is not necessarily the exercise that is the primary cause of increased longevity but the relationship between eating a healthy diet (at least removing unhealthy foods), exercise, and health, all playing a role synergistically.